TH #9 Ready?
Towards Home #9
Ready?
August, 2001
Burmese Buddhists talk constantly of annica, the law of impermanence. Nothing is forever, everything is in a process of change. But it would be so much more bearable if that change could be a smooth journey rather than a series of rough leaps and bounds across precarious terrain.
Burmese Buddhists talk constantly of annica, the law of impermanence. Nothing is forever, everything is in a process of change. But it would be so much more bearable if that change could be a smooth journey rather than a series of rough leaps and bounds across precarious terrain.
-- Aung San Suu Kyi
Several years ago, in yet another attempt to increase my personal efficiency, I purchased a Franklin Planner, one of those monster books designed to contain every important piece of information about a person – appointments, address book, vital stats, medical information, anniversaries, gift ideas for friends and family …everything. In many ways, it did its job and I have relied on it increasingly. However, I purposefully skipped over the self-help section that asks me to create a pyramid chart. I was to write down my values and beliefs, then create goals for myself based on those values, then have my “to do” list grow out of those goals. All this seemed a bit much. I bought an organizer, not a therapist.
Over the past several months, I have had a slight change of heart. As I was trying to decide whether to leave my job at EarthRights International and launch a new project, I started thinking a lot about leaving Thailand. Not considering leaving, but just imagining how I would feel if I decided to go. That’s when the values-goals-tasks concept sunk in (though not in chart form). I imagined what I would regret most about leaving. Not playing enough volleyball? Not perfecting the Thai language? Not losing 10 pounds? While I spend a good deal of time on these types of activities in the interest of living a balanced, healthy life, I realized that I would have deep regrets if I did not implement a project on transitional justice, which I have been thinking about for about five years.
It’s embarrassing for me to admit that a trite expression has taken on important meaning in my life. It’s like taking a pop song and making it one’s anthem (“love the one your with, do-do-do” or “you are safe in my hear and my heart will go on” Aaaaaah!). Live each day as if it were your last always seemed to me a ticket to hedonism. After all, on my last day I want to be having a good time. However, with the stakes being raised by the political situation inside Burma as well as a revelation that I may eventually tire of my time here in Thailand, I am adjusting a bit and living my life as if my time here is finite, and I want to make the most of my opportunity while I am here.
I have not written since last November, so perhaps I’m getting ahead of myself …
First, an update on the situation in Burma. Since last October, the leader of the Burmese pro-democracy movement, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, and the Burmese military regime have been engaged in closed-door discussions. Their communication provides the first hope in years for a negotiated settlement to Burma’s political crisis. Attempts by the political leaders to participate in dialogue with one another have stalemated continually, and the issue of retribution has been a sticking point. In fact, following the 1990 election, which Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy (NLD) won by a landslide, U Kyi Maung, the NLD Deputy Chairman, announced that Nuremberg-style trials could not be ruled out in Burma once the NLD was in power. The ruling military never recognized the results of the election and has maintained its grip on power. Thus, people inside Burma have been unable to seek redress for the human rights abuses they have suffered.
No one is certain about the topics that the NLD and the junta are discussing, but news of the talks gave impetus to several groups here to consider whether they are prepared or not for a transition to democracy. Friends and colleagues know that this topic is of particular interest to me (I studied Argentina’s 1983-89 transition to democracy in graduate school), and last Spring I started getting regular requests from groups here for advice and feedback on projects related to a transition. Because of this surge in interest in preparing for a transition, I decided to leave my work researching the Tasang Dam in Burma’s Shan State to pursue a project on transitional justice full-time.
Transitional justice is a delicate topic among the pro-democracy movement, as there is a common misperception that equates justice with revenge. Many people fear that public discussion about accountability for human rights abuses is tantamount to backing the ruling military junta into a corner. They fear that such a zero-sum game hinders the prospects for a negotiated settlement which can only be reached if the generals do not feel threatened by the prospects of retribution. At the same time, there is a common, contradictory perception that severe limits must be placed on the military and perpetrators of human rights abuses must be jailed; any policies that deny these options are too conciliatory and unacceptable. In reality, an understanding of people’s values and beliefs as well as increased knowledge about options and models from other societies would aid the negotiations. A truly sustainable settlement of the political crisis in Burma can be reached neither with an amnesiac nor a revengeful approach, but rather with a true understanding of the past.
With the goal of creating an accurate historical record of the abuses carried out by the military in Burma, I joined a Burmese activist who is running the Human Rights Education Institute of Burma (HREIB) to launch a pilot project on transitional justice. The idea is to let people know about what has happened and what is going on currently in the field, e.g. South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission, attempts by a Spanish judge to try Chilean General Augusto Pinochet for human rights abuses, and the war crimes trial attempting to hold Slobadon Milosovic responsible for abuses in the former Yugoslavia. In addition, we will be doing some research, asking a wide array of people what they think should happen to human rights abusers if there is a transition to democracy, and what their communities’ top priorities will be in a transition. Finally, we will try to get all the groups who are doing their own, isolated work on these issues to come together on a collaborative project.
Since May, I’ve been compiling technical resources, writing the project design, and corresponding with potential funders. At present, it remains a penniless project but I am optimistic that by year’s end I will be able to implement the year-long pilot project.
Meanwhile, the closed-door talks between Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the military junta remain cloaked in secrecy, and patience among pro-democracy activists is waning. Many fear that the junta is using the talks as a public relations tool to restrain economic sanctions and attract investment and aid from the U.N., Japan, and Southeast Asian countries. The only recent, concrete improvement in the human rights situation in the country, seemingly related to the talks, is the recent release of about 100 high-profile political prisoners of the 1800 in jails in Burma. Most of the political prisoners who have been released are elected Members of Parliament who were “invited” to what the junta called “guest houses” after Daw Aung San Suu Kyi called for a convening of the Parliament in 1998. The talks have had no effect on forced labor, extrajudicial killings, extortion … all of the abuses that have given the Burmese junta its notoriety and pariah status. Many student political prisoners, such as Min Ko Naing and Thet Win Aung, still languish in jails in retaliation for their nonviolent efforts to organize public demonstrations against the military. The military and their allies continue to displace thousands of Shan villagers to make room for increased heroin and metamphetamine production in the Golden Triangle.
The cautious optimism that greeted the initial news of high-level political talks is turning increasingly to skepticism about the junta’s intentions. Still, a number of new initiatives, including this transitional justice project, emerged in response to the news of a potential transition. It feels healthy and hopeful to be working on a different, more positive version of, “what would you regret if you left tomorrow.” It takes hope rather than regret as a starting point and asks, if that thing you wished for the most in the world were given you tomorrow, would you be ready?
Several years ago, in yet another attempt to increase my personal efficiency, I purchased a Franklin Planner, one of those monster books designed to contain every important piece of information about a person – appointments, address book, vital stats, medical information, anniversaries, gift ideas for friends and family …everything. In many ways, it did its job and I have relied on it increasingly. However, I purposefully skipped over the self-help section that asks me to create a pyramid chart. I was to write down my values and beliefs, then create goals for myself based on those values, then have my “to do” list grow out of those goals. All this seemed a bit much. I bought an organizer, not a therapist.
Over the past several months, I have had a slight change of heart. As I was trying to decide whether to leave my job at EarthRights International and launch a new project, I started thinking a lot about leaving Thailand. Not considering leaving, but just imagining how I would feel if I decided to go. That’s when the values-goals-tasks concept sunk in (though not in chart form). I imagined what I would regret most about leaving. Not playing enough volleyball? Not perfecting the Thai language? Not losing 10 pounds? While I spend a good deal of time on these types of activities in the interest of living a balanced, healthy life, I realized that I would have deep regrets if I did not implement a project on transitional justice, which I have been thinking about for about five years.
It’s embarrassing for me to admit that a trite expression has taken on important meaning in my life. It’s like taking a pop song and making it one’s anthem (“love the one your with, do-do-do” or “you are safe in my hear and my heart will go on” Aaaaaah!). Live each day as if it were your last always seemed to me a ticket to hedonism. After all, on my last day I want to be having a good time. However, with the stakes being raised by the political situation inside Burma as well as a revelation that I may eventually tire of my time here in Thailand, I am adjusting a bit and living my life as if my time here is finite, and I want to make the most of my opportunity while I am here.
I have not written since last November, so perhaps I’m getting ahead of myself …
First, an update on the situation in Burma. Since last October, the leader of the Burmese pro-democracy movement, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, and the Burmese military regime have been engaged in closed-door discussions. Their communication provides the first hope in years for a negotiated settlement to Burma’s political crisis. Attempts by the political leaders to participate in dialogue with one another have stalemated continually, and the issue of retribution has been a sticking point. In fact, following the 1990 election, which Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy (NLD) won by a landslide, U Kyi Maung, the NLD Deputy Chairman, announced that Nuremberg-style trials could not be ruled out in Burma once the NLD was in power. The ruling military never recognized the results of the election and has maintained its grip on power. Thus, people inside Burma have been unable to seek redress for the human rights abuses they have suffered.
No one is certain about the topics that the NLD and the junta are discussing, but news of the talks gave impetus to several groups here to consider whether they are prepared or not for a transition to democracy. Friends and colleagues know that this topic is of particular interest to me (I studied Argentina’s 1983-89 transition to democracy in graduate school), and last Spring I started getting regular requests from groups here for advice and feedback on projects related to a transition. Because of this surge in interest in preparing for a transition, I decided to leave my work researching the Tasang Dam in Burma’s Shan State to pursue a project on transitional justice full-time.
Transitional justice is a delicate topic among the pro-democracy movement, as there is a common misperception that equates justice with revenge. Many people fear that public discussion about accountability for human rights abuses is tantamount to backing the ruling military junta into a corner. They fear that such a zero-sum game hinders the prospects for a negotiated settlement which can only be reached if the generals do not feel threatened by the prospects of retribution. At the same time, there is a common, contradictory perception that severe limits must be placed on the military and perpetrators of human rights abuses must be jailed; any policies that deny these options are too conciliatory and unacceptable. In reality, an understanding of people’s values and beliefs as well as increased knowledge about options and models from other societies would aid the negotiations. A truly sustainable settlement of the political crisis in Burma can be reached neither with an amnesiac nor a revengeful approach, but rather with a true understanding of the past.
With the goal of creating an accurate historical record of the abuses carried out by the military in Burma, I joined a Burmese activist who is running the Human Rights Education Institute of Burma (HREIB) to launch a pilot project on transitional justice. The idea is to let people know about what has happened and what is going on currently in the field, e.g. South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission, attempts by a Spanish judge to try Chilean General Augusto Pinochet for human rights abuses, and the war crimes trial attempting to hold Slobadon Milosovic responsible for abuses in the former Yugoslavia. In addition, we will be doing some research, asking a wide array of people what they think should happen to human rights abusers if there is a transition to democracy, and what their communities’ top priorities will be in a transition. Finally, we will try to get all the groups who are doing their own, isolated work on these issues to come together on a collaborative project.
Since May, I’ve been compiling technical resources, writing the project design, and corresponding with potential funders. At present, it remains a penniless project but I am optimistic that by year’s end I will be able to implement the year-long pilot project.
Meanwhile, the closed-door talks between Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the military junta remain cloaked in secrecy, and patience among pro-democracy activists is waning. Many fear that the junta is using the talks as a public relations tool to restrain economic sanctions and attract investment and aid from the U.N., Japan, and Southeast Asian countries. The only recent, concrete improvement in the human rights situation in the country, seemingly related to the talks, is the recent release of about 100 high-profile political prisoners of the 1800 in jails in Burma. Most of the political prisoners who have been released are elected Members of Parliament who were “invited” to what the junta called “guest houses” after Daw Aung San Suu Kyi called for a convening of the Parliament in 1998. The talks have had no effect on forced labor, extrajudicial killings, extortion … all of the abuses that have given the Burmese junta its notoriety and pariah status. Many student political prisoners, such as Min Ko Naing and Thet Win Aung, still languish in jails in retaliation for their nonviolent efforts to organize public demonstrations against the military. The military and their allies continue to displace thousands of Shan villagers to make room for increased heroin and metamphetamine production in the Golden Triangle.
The cautious optimism that greeted the initial news of high-level political talks is turning increasingly to skepticism about the junta’s intentions. Still, a number of new initiatives, including this transitional justice project, emerged in response to the news of a potential transition. It feels healthy and hopeful to be working on a different, more positive version of, “what would you regret if you left tomorrow.” It takes hope rather than regret as a starting point and asks, if that thing you wished for the most in the world were given you tomorrow, would you be ready?
posted by PeaJayPee @ 6:19 PM
0 comments
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home